| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:35:50 -0400 From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Martin Bligh <mbligh@...igh.org>, marcelo@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, drepper@...hat.com, linux-mm@...ck.org Subject: Re: OOM notifications On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:11:12 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > Sure, but in terms of high-level userspace interface, being able to > select() on a group of priority buckets (spread across different > nodes, zones and cgroups) seems a lot more flexible than any > signal-based approach we could come up with. Absolutely, the process needs to be able to just poll or select on a file descriptor from the process main loop. I am not convinced that the magic of NUMA memory distribution and NUMA memory pressure should be visible to userspace. Due to the thundering herd problem we cannot wake up all of the processes that select on the filedescriptor at the same time anyway, so we can (later on) add NUMA magic to the process selection logic in the kernel to only wake up processes on the right NUMA nodes. The initial patch probably does not need that. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists